If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Take the best players on the board that can help accomplish 1 and 2 and the draft will be a success. Heck, I'd be ok with drafting 2 TEs.

That was essentially my thinking. Everyone automatically equates receiver to WR. Not me. Who was our leading receiver last year? A player like Ertz or Eifert would be worth a Round 1 pick. Great if we can trade down but we talk that every year and it rarely happens. Both of the TEs mentioned would be impact players in Year 1. Isn't that what we want from a Round 1 pick?

User Info Menu

Join Date

Oct 2008

Posts

3,417

Originally Posted by Oviedo

That was essentially my thinking. Everyone automatically equates receiver to WR. Not me. Who was our leading receiver last year? A player like Ertz or Eifert would be worth a Round 1 pick. Great if we can trade down but we talk that every year and it rarely happens. Both of the TEs mentioned would be impact players in Year 1. Isn't that what we want from a Round 1 pick?

User Info Menu

Join Date

Aug 2012

Posts

2,026

Originally Posted by Oviedo

That was essentially my thinking. Everyone automatically equates receiver to WR. Not me. Who was our leading receiver last year? A player like Ertz or Eifert would be worth a Round 1 pick. Great if we can trade down but we talk that every year and it rarely happens. Both of the TEs mentioned would be impact players in Year 1. Isn't that what we want from a Round 1 pick?

Hypothetically, let's say we do lose/not re-sign Starks, Hampton, Harrison, Wallace, Mendenhall, Colon, Lewis, which is certainly possible ALL could be the case. With that understanding, do you STILL go with TE in round 1? I understand the possible value of a play making TE, but imagine the larger holes we will have considering who we will be losing. I say take the absolute best possible producer but with the exception of QB, TE, C and that's about it. Every other position could be in play round 1. At 17, we could still nab a difference maker.

User Info Menu

Join Date

Oct 2008

Posts

3,417

Originally Posted by lloydroid

Hypothetically, let's say we do lose/not re-sign Starks, Hampton, Harrison, Wallace, Mendenhall, Colon, Lewis, which is certainly possible ALL could be the case. With that understanding, do you STILL go with TE in round 1? I understand the possible value of a play making TE, but imagine the larger holes we will have considering who we will be losing. I say take the absolute best possible producer but with the exception of QB, TE, C and that's about it. Every other position could be in play round 1. At 17, we could still nab a difference maker.

However, a TE is good for production in the passing game AND production in the passing game if you get the right one.

User Info Menu

Join Date

May 2008

Location

man from Sudan

Posts

3,320

Only 2 wr under contract and with the safety issues, I serious doubt that the first pick will not be the Texas safety or the two wr's from TN or Cal. I'm so sure that I'm willing to take bets. If either three is there I bet 100 dollars guaranteed. lol

User Info Menu

Join Date

May 2008

Location

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, Australia

Posts

6,030

Originally Posted by Steelhere10

Only 2 wr under contract and with the safety issues, I serious doubt that the first pick will not be the Texas safety or the two wr's from TN or Cal. I'm so sure that I'm willing to take bets. If either three is there I bet 100 dollars guaranteed. lol